Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Sherrod said she first heard of the possible controversy when someone e-mailed her Thursday to taunt her about her comments. She immediately forwarded the e-mail to the USDA so the agency would be aware. She was told that someone would look into it.
She said it wasn't until Monday that she heard back, and by then, she was being asked for her resignation.

"someone e-mailed her Thursday to taunt her about her comments."

Attn news media: Please investigate and report on this angle of the story. Andrew Breitbart claims he did not have the complete video, and that the portion he received from his source on Sunday came pre-misleadingly edited (breitbarted) and chyroned with the false allegation about "taxpayer money." Breitbart is obviously a liar in general, but if he is telling the truth in this particular regard, then who misleadingly edited this video in that all-too-familiar Breitbart way, and what was his/her motivation and intended outcome? Was it the same person who e-mailed her four days before the story broke, and if not, what is this e-mailer's connection to the misleading video and story?

I maintain that either Breitbart is responsible for the misleading edit, or his mysterious source is the culprit. The evidence--both previous experience (the ACORN fiasco, the Teabuggers,...) and even the most cursory look at who's dirty fingerprints are all over every aspect of this current bit of fiction up to now--says it's Breitbart, but if he's going to place the blame on his mysterious source, he really ought to be expected to prove it. (You know... the same way Andrew was demanding proof that the nice old couple really were "the white farmers" Ms Sherrod was talking about in the video, in his CNN appearance on Tuesday.) I mean, if he wasn't even willing to trust the 80+ year old couple who self-report that they were "the white farmers" in question, without launching an investigation into their background, then I see no reason why anyone in or out of the media should take Breitbart's word that there really is a mysterious source who misleadingly edited the video without his knowledge or consent. So like Mr Breitbart, I expect the media to do their due diligence, and do everything possible to ferret out the truth, and continue asking the questions until they get answers. (And maybe... just maybe, there's some wealthy liberal blogger or media gadfly who's willing to offer a large reward for documentary proof of exactly who misleadingly breitbarted that video, and when, and why, and at whose behest... Y'know... Just like Andrew himself might do...)((Or maybe those journolist guys and gals can take up a collection...))